I take this ending also to be diminutive, and to be possibly akin to our ish, as in blue-ish, which, as signifying a "little blue," seems to have the force of a diminutive. Hence we have Riches, corresponding with an O.G. Richizo, and a present French Richez; and Willis, corresponding with an O.G. Willizo. Then we have Godsoe, corresponding with an O.G. Godizo, of which Cotiso, mentioned in Horace (p. 20), is a High German form; and Abbiss, corresponding with the name, Abissa, of the son of Hengest, from, as supposed, Gothic aba, man. And we have Prentiss, corresponding with an A.S. Prentsa (=Prentisa), respecting which I have elsewhere suggested that the name should be properly Pentsa. Another name which I take to be from this ending is Daisy. There is an A.S. Dægsa, which as Dagsi, with the alternative ending in i, would give us Daisy. We have another name, Gipsy, which I take to be from Gibb or Gipp (A.S. geban, to give) with this ending. This ending in is is naturally very apt to be corrupted into ish, and it is from this source, I take it, that we have such names as Radish, Reddish, Varnish, Burnish, and Parish, the two last of which we have also in their proper form as Burness, and Parez or Paris.
The ending in cock.
This ending is not one that enters into the Teutonic system, unless so far as it may turn out to be a corruption of something else. I have not met with it earlier than A.D. 1400, nor do I know of anything to make me think that it is much older. There has been at different times a good deal of discussion as to its origin in Notes and Queries and elsewhere. Mr. Lower has supposed it to be a diminutive, for which I do not think that any etymological sanction can be found, unless indeed we can suppose it to be a corruption of the diminutive eck or ock before referred to, which seems not impossible. But on the whole I am disposed to agree with the suggestion of a writer in Notes and Queries that cock is a corruption of cot,—not, however, in the sense which I suppose him to entertain, of cot as a local word, but of cot as an ancient ending, the High German form of gaud or got, signifying, as supposed, "Goth." So far as the phonetic relationship between the two words cock and cot is concerned, we have an instance, among others, in our word apricot, which was originally apricock.
I am influenced very much in coming to the above conclusion by finding coq as a not unfrequent ending in French names, as in Balcoq and Billecoq, also in Aucoq, Lecoq, Videcocq, Vilcocq, which latter seem to be names corresponding with our Alcock, Laycock, Woodcock, and Willcock. They might all be formed on Teutonic stems, if we suppose Lecoq and Laycock to have lost a d, like Lewis and Lucas, from leod, people. Now, that the ending gaud, with its alternative forms got, caud, cot, is present in French names as well as in English will be clearly seen from the following. From the Old German Faregaud we have Faragut, and the French have Farcot; from the O.G. Benigaud they have Penicaud, and we have Pennycad; from the O.G. Ermingaud they have Armingaud, and from Megingaud they have Maingot; from the O.G. Aringaud we have Heringaud, from Wulfegaud we have Woolcot, from Adogoto we have Addicott, and from Madalgaud we have Medlicott. I am also disposed on the same principle to take Northcott, notwithstanding its local appearance, to represent the O.G. name Nordgaud, and in this case we have also the name Norcock to compare.
Presuming the above derivation to be the correct one, the question then arises,—Has this ending come to us through the French, or has the corruption proceeded simultaneously in both countries? That the latter has been the case, the French Videcocq, as compared with our Woodcock, goes some way to show, the one having the High German form vid or wid, and the other the Saxon form wud. I may also mention, as being, so far as it goes, in accordance with the above theory, that we have a number of names both in the form of cot and cock, as Adcock and Addicott, Alcock and Alcott, Norcott and Norcock, Jeffcock and Jeffcott. I do not, however, desire to come to a definite conclusion, though, as far as I am able to carry it, the inquiry seems in favour of the view which I have advocated. But the whole subject will bear some further elucidation.
FOOTNOTES:
[8] How or when this change took place is a question that awaits solving, but I observe that, in 1265, the Countess of Montford, giving names (or sobriquets) to her servants, calls one of her messengers Treubodi (trusty messenger), and not Treuboda, as the Anglo-Saxon form would have been.
[9] This name appears as Μουνδιλας in Procopius, but, judging by the present pronunciation of Greek, it would sound as Mundila.